Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 2 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
Arthur Goldberg said:
“History has established that the Philadelphia Convention was a success, but it cannot be denied that it broke the restraints intended to limit its power and agenda. Logic therefore compels one conclusion: Any claim that the Congress could, by statute, limit a convention’s agenda is pure speculation. Any such ‘procedures legislation’ might well be unconstitutional and would almost certainly be unenforceable.”
Should there be a constitutional convention that exceeded its stated, limited purpose and voted several amendments, could Congress declare the amendments invalid? No one knows, but it is not overly apprehensive to envision confrontation and possible chaos. Nor can there be assurance that delegates would be selected for their views only on the limited purpose, possibly putting at risk the maintenance of those fundamental American values that, thus far, have protected our citizens from totalitarian government.
Public support for a constitutional amendment to balance the budget is shrinking. A recent Gallup poll indicated that less than half the population supports this method of balancing the federal budget.
The balanced budget amendment was recently defeated in the U.S. Senate. Supporters of the amendment, who are using the threat of a constitutional convention to force Congressional approval of the measure, have vowed to intensify their efforts at the state level. It is hoped that a number of legislators are coming to the realization that a constitutional convention could spark a constitutional crisis. They should understand, as former defense secretary Laird points out, that a convention would deeply disturb our allies and send our foes the message that our government is unstable.
State legislators should realize that their petitions are not general resolutions without real consequences. In one sense, past actions are understandable. Incredibly, over one-half of the states calling for a convention have done so without the benefit of public hearings, debate or recorded vote. Many state legislators believed they were voting for a balanced budget amendment instead of a constitutional convention.
What can we in Virginia do to avert this impending crisis? We can ask our legislators to consider withdrawal of an ill-advised petition action before the required two-thirds vote is reached to avoid just the kinds of constitutional chaos that now loom.
Reasonable people can disagree about how to control federal spending and the merits of a constitutional amendment to achieve a balanced budget. However, it is not reasonable to hold the Constitution hostage for the latter purpose.
Spong, a former U.S. Senator and dean of the William & Mary Law School, is currently professor emeritus at the school’s Institute of Bill of Rights Law.
96.4%